Tag Archives: election

Okay. I feel better now. Yesterday, as many of you may have seen, I was more than a little miffed with John McCain for bowing out of the presidential debate this Friday evening. I was stunned. How could a man running for the most powerful position in the world show such, if you’ll forgive the expression, a streak of yellow?

Well, silly me. I knew it was politics, I just didn’t know to what degree. Or angle, as the case may be. Y’see… well, here, I’ll just link CNN’s political ticker right here on WP.

McCain supporter Sen. Lindsey Graham tells CNN the McCain campaign is proposing to the Presidential Debate Commission and the Obama camp that if there’s no bailout deal by Friday, the first presidential debate should take the place of the VP debate, currently scheduled for next Thursday, October 2 in St. Louis.

In this scenario, the vice presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin would be rescheduled for a date yet to be determined, and take place in Oxford, Mississippi, currently slated to be the site of the first presidential faceoff this Friday.

So there you have it. Last night’s suspension of the campaign and refusal to debate had less to do with not wanting to debate Obama than it did not wanting Gov. Palin to debate Joe Biden. Small wonder; he’s going to chop her up into itty bitty peices, chew her up and spit her out.

Sen. McCain, if you are this afraid for Gov. Palin, why on earth did you choose her as a running mate?

I’ve spent the past 15 hours or so, when not sleeping, watching the talking heads. I’ve even tuned in to Fox news just to make sure their eyeballs haven’t exploded trying to work their poor abused heads around the idea that capitalism is what got us into this mess. Rest assured; Fox News has learned nothing from the current crisis.

It’s been an instructive 15 hours (aside from the sleeping bit). The pundits all seem to be focusing on

a. Whether or not “The Bailout* ” is a good thing and

b. Whether John McCain rushing back to Washington and suspending his campaign is a gambit or concern.

None of them seem to be able to answer A, and the jury is hung on B. Only one person, The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza, got it right. Last night while discussing the move by McCain to suspend his campaign and the debate, Chris said “Anyone who thinks that anything a candidate does this close to an election isn’t about politics, doesn’t know much about politics.” And the truth shall set you free.

Don’t think it’s true? Well, let’s take a look at what’s being said by the McCain camp. This morning, John McCain’s spokeswoman Nicole Wallace actually sidestepped the question to both Joe Scarborough and Matt Lauer. She told Scarborough “Is that what you thought? I think the American people will remember the bipartisan message coming from both candidates.” Really, Ms Wallace? Is that why John McCain rushed out to make the first statement? So that everyone would remember the joint statement that came later? Way to underestimate the intelligence of the American people. The reason for that was fairly transparent, and we all know it. It was politics, pure and simple. Ms. Wallace’s remarks to Matt Lauer here. In both cases, she seems reluctant to actually answer the question put to her, namely: “If the joint message about fixing the problem was what was important, what was your guy doing if it wasn’t upstaging?” I’m more than a little annoyed that two seasoned journalists were unable to force an answer to that question and let it go at a ridiculous hand waving justification.

Neither Sen. McCain nor Sen. Obama are part of the committee attempting to solve this economic crisis. At this point, the Repugs are dragging their feet against passing anything in order to correct the situation, and there’s no foreseeable solution. If no one blinks, what then? We put the election on hold, too?

Sen. Jim Demint just said that “new thinking” is needed on the issue, and he “trusts the free market.” Okay, Sen. Demint; isn’t that WHAT GOT US INTO THE PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE?! Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said infusing presidential politics in the situation will only muddy the waters. Chuck Hagel said last night that everyone in Washington knows the meetings in the Oval Office isn’t where the work gets done; it’s the breakaway meetings AFTER those meetings that actually accomplishes something.

Which leads us right back to: Why the hell are we ONLY focusing on this crisis? We also have TWOT (the war on terror) going on. Should we put government on hold until Sen. McCain comes up with a solution for that as well? And….WHO has a messiah complex again, please?

Ladies and gentlemen, let us buy a clue, if necessary. We cannot simply keep putting things on hold because something comes up. We deserve to know who will be leading us, regardless of which candidate is chosen. It IS our country, after all. We’re the ones making the decision. We deserve to have all the data we can get before we make what may well be the most important choice of our lives.

Senator McCain, step up. Heroes do not run from a challenge, sir.

*I think it’s deserving of Caps. In 75 years, school kids are going to learn about the Great Globalization Crisis of ’08. They’re gonna want to know why we were so stoopid.

So, once again, I’m sitting here watching MSNBC, and they’re talking about how Barack Obama now has a 9% lead in the polls over John McCain. And as they say it, they receive a notice saying that John McCain now wants to put the debate on hold until the crisis is solved, and Barack Obama needs to “come back to Washington to help fix it.”

I must say, it was a brilliant stroke. McCain has been looking for a way to stop the bleeding and get back in front since this crisis broke. I watched Sen. McCain, and am now watching Sen. Obama, who is saying that Sen. Tom Colvin suggested to both candidates that they reach out to each other and make a joint statement. Which I find interesting. He’s now going over his four point demands for the bill, which include that Wall Street execs not get “golden parachutes” for their reckless greed.

Both men seem to be earnest in their sincerity. My question is: How much of it is pandering, and how much is honest concern for making sure this issue gets solved?

Post speeches edit: I think it’s interesting to note that Sen. McCain did not open the floor to any questions whatsoever, and when Sen. Obama opened for questions and was asked about the debate, he said “I think it’s important that we go on with it….the next president is going to have to be able to do more than one thing, and it’s important for the American people to see that.”

So there I was, stumbling around the net and sort of half watching Chris Matthews interview John McCain’s press secretary about the economic mess and the $700B bailout put before congress, and you will never guess what was said. The exact quote was:

“John McCain was fighting for regulation from the floor of the senate five years ago! John McCain NEVER wanted deregulation….”

Oh. You. Lying. WHORE!

Riddle me this, Batman….who’s in the video repeating “less regulation” over and over if it isn’t John McCain? Who was the senator to whom the journalist was referring when he spoke of a bill to deregulate back in 1999 if it wasn’t John McCain? Why do these idiots continue to believe their lies will not be caught within the space of ten minutes?

As reported at this site, Bob Barr, the presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party, has filed an injunction claiming that neither John McCain nor Barack Obama had submitted the necessary paperwork to be considered as candidates for President of the United States, and demanding that they be removed from Texas ballots, thus putting into question the status of Texas’ 34 electoral votes.

[But}…the Democratic and Republican state parties had filed official documents with the Secretary of State stating their presumed presidential candidates. The Democrats threw in Joe Biden’s name and the Republicans said they would report back with the name of their vice presidential contender, which they did.

Apparently, the Supreme Court felt that was sufficient, especially in light of the catastrophic alientation of voters if neither of the major party candidates could appear on the November ballot.

C’mon. Let us be honest. It’s not surprising, sure, but it isn’t about the “alienation of voters” nearly as much as it’s about the fact that McCain can’t win without Texas. He needs us BAD, as badly as Obama needs California. I don’t doubt, though, stubborn as the citizens of my adopted state seem to be, they still would’ve shown up, and still would’ve written McCain’s name in on the ballot if such was necessary.

A rather industrious website has sprung up called “McCainpedia.” It has a fact checker showing how many lies and distortions John McCain has told about himself, his running mate, and Barack Obama. It’s currently at 54. When it reaches his age, should we throw a party?

Look out, it’s the Kerry Catch Phrase, wielded by a terrified neocon near you. But this time…it doesn’t seem to have the sticking power it did when John Kerry was the Dem candidate.

Maybe it’s because it’s hard to pin that tag on a man who owns one house while attempting to support a man who admits he doesn’t know how many he owns. Maybe it’s because it doesn’t seem to fit a guy who worked his way up from blue collar roots through school on a scholarship and succeeding beyond all expectations, just like every “pull yerself up by your bootstraps” conservative says people SHOULD do. Or just maybe people are finally recognizing that “a guy you can have a beer with” doesn’t necessarily know a whole hell of a lot about foreign policy. Or the economy. Or infrastructure. Or governing wisely. Maybe it’s finally sinking through that what you need in that particular case is someone who is known more for his academic accomplishments than for his father getting him into Harvard after squeaking through Yale with a C average. Who knows?

If it makes me elitist that I want a president who won’t make me cringe with anticipatory embarrassment every time he opens his mouth to a foreign dignitary…so be it. If it makes me elitist that I want a president who knows more about the economy than I do, I’ll happily take that label. And if it makes me elitist that I care more about whether or not a candidate is in the deep pockets of more lobbyists in Washington than Rick Santorum instead of what his religions really is? Then guilty as charged. I’m elitist. When it comes to my country, you bet I’m elitist. Because I think my country deserves better than “regular people” in the driver’s seat. I think my country deserves the best. Isn’t that what we’re constantly saying we are? Put up or shutup.